Is Dumbledore Great?

[ftah3]

No: HPFGUIDX 33404

cindysphynx wrote:
> I don't think we can be certain that Snape knows about the boggart 
> cross-dressing episode, although Harry certainly thinks he does.
> 
> The text says:  
> 
> "Snape was in a particularly vindictive mood these days, and no one 
> was in any doubt why.  The story of the boggart assuming Snape's 
> shape, and the way that Neville had dressed it in his grandmother's 
> clothes, had traveled throught he school like wildfire.  Snape 
didn't 
> seem to find it funny.  His eyes flashed menacingly at the very 
> mention of Professor Lupin's name, and he was bullying Neville 
worse 
> than ever."

If a lot of kids are talking about it, and if it can be assumed that 
Dumbledore's giving Snape a cracker containing a vulture-topped hat 
at Christmas is not wild coincidence, Snape would probably be the 
*only* person in school who doesn't know.

> If we're trying to make McGonagall's contribution seem significant 
by 
> comparing it to Dumbledore's, this will not be an easy task.  
> Dumbledore has a number of honors, has defeated a great dark 
wizard, 
> and has the ear of the Minister of Magic.  Equally important, he is 
a 
> leader, as shown by the fact that he, not McGonagall, is calling 
the 
> shots at the end of GoF.  McGonagall, on the other hand, is reduced 
> to standing guard over Barty Crouch, and we all know how that 
turned 
> out.  

Of course Dumbledore is a Great Wizard who is calling the shots at 
Hogwarts.  Certainly he defeated Grindewald back in the day, and has 
no doubt done many great things in his life.  

My point was to show that McGonnagal is, despite general opinion, an 
active, busy, and significant member of the story, and that her worth 
can be measured not by the fact that she hasn't defeated a big dark 
wizard in the past and isn't vague and mysterious and Obi-Wanish, but 
by the fact that she physically, actually *does* a lot, as a teacher 
and administrator, as an active participant in the lives of her 
students, and as someone who is trusted by the great Albus Dumbledore 
himself.
 
> Nah, McGonagall is underutilized.  But there's still time to make 
> things better.  Maybe McGonagall will have to volunteer for some 
> hideously dangerous mission and perish bravely in the attempt.  She 
> would die because no one would dare attempt to rescue her for fear 
of 
> turning her into a damsel in distress.  :-)

On one hand, I don't see that the worth of McGonnagal as a character 
would be heightened by her turning into McXenagal.  But, be that as 
it may, my own previous point was based on 'current' events (i.e. 
what characters actually do in the books, as opposed to what they are 
reported to have done in the past).  My opinion has always been that 
Dumbledore is aging, and fast, and shows it in the books.  His power, 
along with his youth, is waning.  He may have defeated Grindewald 
back in the day, and he may strike fear in the anti-heart of 
Voldemort (based on, imho, a carry over from Riddle's Hogwart's days, 
when Dumbledore was the Professor who scared him and saw through him 
~ but not, as far as we've been told, by any actual wizard duel which 
*proved* Dumbeldore's greater strength).  On the other hand, I think 
Dumbledore knows he's no match for Voldemort these days.  So, fine, 
dandy, that's my opinion of him.

On the other hand, I'm not trying to say that McGonnagal is better, 
or even equal to Dumbledore in magical power.  What I'm trying to say 
is that she's *does* stuff.  Meaning, she's active, daily, teaching, 
administering, practicing magic, in the trenches of real life, so to 
speak.  

However, based on what both of them actually do in the stories, if 
McGonnagal needs to go off and do something exciting and dramatic to 
prove that in the current time frame she's worthwhile, then so does 
Dumbledore, who has done little more than be the Hogwarts figurehead 
and Harry's idol, and hand out a few wise words.

(To be clear, I like both characters.  A lot, actually, and for 
different reasons.  I'm just of the opinion that a character doesn't 
have to partake in melodrama and kicko-fighto stuff in order to be 
interesting/significant/well-used.  I mean, I like action-adventure 
as much as the next person, but I also see a great deal of value in 
people who bring other attributes and talents to a tale than the 
outrightly slam-bangin' kind.)

Blibbidy-blah.  I'm rambling, and becoming tiresome.  So, shutting up 
now.

Mahoney